Do you aid a BG you just blasted?

Gee! I’ll try to act grown up and real....

I’m not an attorney so take my comments with a grain of salt.

In our CHL class we teach students NEVER shoot to kill. You shoot to
stop and/or neutralize the threat. Once the threat is neutralized (for
example the burglar is “down”) there is no justification for deadly force.
If you shoot a non-threat you can be charged with murder.

-------
There are many factors to consider. Even in Texas, there would be a big
difference between shooting a burglar in Bexar County (San Antonio) and
Comal County (where I live). We are a suburban/rural county, provincial
in our politics and believers in “a man’s home is his castle”.

If I use deadly force to neutralize a burglar, my first priority is the safety
and welfare of my family and (if any) guests. Mr. BG comes in third (at
best).

Yes, of course we’d call 9-1-1 immediately - but I’m going to be sure Mr.
BG is no longer a threat. If he’s wounded, I’ll hold him at gunpoint. If
he’s dead I’ll still watch him. I’ll take care of the more seriously
wounded people first - with priority given to the folks legally in my home.

I’m an EMT. I’ve been trained in a method of triage which I would
employ. If my daughter has a sliver and the BG is bleeding to death, I’d
probably help the BG if I thought it was safe to do so. Otherwise, tough
luck, BG, you picked the wrong home.

-----
If I were downtown at night (theatre, etc.) and we’re attacked by a gang,
my first priority is the welfare of myself and my party. I’ll call 9-1-1
once the Good Guys are safe - Mr. BG will just have to wait.

Sigh! So many scenarios; so little time.

-----
By the way, according to the National Safety Council, only Vermont has
written law requiring off-duty healthcare workers to provide care in case
of emergencies. If we have any obligation at all, it usually is limited to
calling 9-1-1 or otherwise trying to obtain aid.
 
Most of my "what if" scenarios imply a public but deserted place.

If my original response was unclear, but I think that a lot of people would agree with this:

If I were the only witness to the fracas, I'd simply leave and not look back... The world is a very cold place...

------------------
Remember: When you attempt to rationalize two inconsistent positions, you risk drowning as your own sewage backs up... Yankee Doodle
 
Let's not miss the obvious. Call 911, report that someone is seriously injured, send EMS, wait 'till they arrive to announce that he is a felon, he's been shot, and he is still armed. Correct me if I'm wrong, experts, but I BELIEVE they will then stand back and call LEOs to come and ascertain that he is not a threat before so much as laying a (rubber) glove on him.

After which your own (unpaid and unprofessional) requirement to render aid becomes unimportant. If the professionals regard him as too much of a risk until LEOs have certified him as without risk, why should the guy he just tried to kill be expected to help him prior to that time?
 
othermarc,
You beat me to the punch. I have some friends whose house was robbed while no one was home.
Afterward the self defense issue was brought up to one of the officers. He told the wife that if you shoot a threat in your home make sure said threat is NEVER again a threat.
I just hope that I will never have to deal with such a situation.

"An armed society is a polite society"
 
While dead men do not sue, their familys do. And will.

In one case i know of the BG was shot three times in the upper torso with the GG's bullets hitting the heart twice and taking out both lungs. The GG called for the police and EMS, who arrived in minutes. There was a doctor near by that witnessed the shooting or arrived within seconds of teh shooting. He, the doctor, proceded to apply CPR on the BG, which caused him to bleed out.


Ashes to ashes
Dust to dust,
If the bullets don't get ya,
The Doctors must.

------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
"If there be treachery, let there be jehad!"



[This message has been edited by Jim V (edited October 14, 1999).]
 
sbryce, Interesting topic. When one dog jumps another and gets thumped severely, I've never seen the victor attempt to lick the wounds of his attacker who probably wouldn't appreciate it anyway. But we are men not dogs. Thinking about this stuff is good because we ought to train our brains for imaginable scenarios. Mine is what if the wannabe turned out to be one whose bark with a weapon was much worse than his bite and just jumped the wrong "victim". The 260 lb BG turns out to be a 16 yr old with the face of one of my nephews. Sure, his responsibility and his deserved consequences and no apologies to come from me. Yet, I wonder if I would ignore the possibility of aiding someone who was obviously no longer a threat. Then again, those winning dogs hang out at a distance for a reason.

[This message has been edited by G-Freeman (edited October 14, 1999).]
 
I feel so honored that my sig was mentioned, but I lifted it from someone else... I seem to think Mas Ayoob... :)

------------------
Anyone worth shooting, is worth shooting twice...
 
First, I usually keep out of discussions like this because the macho "waste the puke" attitudes really upset me. I had a post in the Tactics section over on Glock Talk about this very issue. Here, I shall remain calm and throw in my 2 cents worth.

I have responded both as an Incident Commander (Fire/EMS) and as an LEO to confrontations involving firearms and I suspect I will do so again. Shooting incidents are messy and you best hope you are never involved in one. Also, if you are involved in a shooting, your past actions, attitude, demeanor (and even your posts on this board) will all enter into the picture. Those of you who have seen fit to publicly announce your intentions to kill the creep rather than stop him have already given your local DA license to suspect your motives and permission to crawl up your behinds with a microscope. Anyone who would neutralize an attacker, then intentionally contribute further to his death should be arrested and charged. Let a jury decide the rest.

Here's how it plays out. When we get a call involving a shooting we respond immediately. While en-route we ask the dispatch center if the scene is secure. Secure means there is law enforcement on the scene and any potential threats have been dealt with. The “threats” are the shooter, the wounded party, and by-standers. This is a crime scene and potentially dangerous to everyone. We leave it up to the discretion of the LEO to tell us when the scene is secure. If the scene is not secure we gather up in a staging area and wait until it is secure. Once on scene we perform triage if there are multiple patients and treat accordingly.

Now, if I had to shoot someone what would I do? Would I perform CPR on a gunshot victim without universal precautions? No, never. Besides, if the guy has expired from ballistic trauma, CPR is a waste of time anyway and no one will fault me for not initiating it in the first place. OK, so the guy is laying on the floor bleeding. I would call 911 and hold him at gunpoint until law enforcement arrived. If I thought the guy was still a potential threat, the most he would get from me would be a towel until he passed out. If I was positive the guy could do no more harm, I would render aid to the extent of my training if I had appropriate resources avaiable. Those of you who have seen gunshot wounds know that the victim can apply direct pressure to extremeties themselves. Serious internal injuries require such things as an IV, MAST, etc. and you can't provide that kind of treatment anyway.

Obviously, my first concern is my personal safety. I feel it would be very unwise to render aid to someone who has tried to kill me, and may still be capable of launching an attack against me. I would then either become a victim myself, or be forced to further injure the attacker.

Unlike most of you, I would have the ability to declare the scene safe prior to the arrival of LEO so EMS could begin treatment. I would do so if I was sure the attacker could do no more harm.

By the way, this is a good scenario, this is the type of thing people who choose to carry a firearm should consider before even applying for the permit.

Try this one:

Bad guy breaks into your house and shoots your wife. You shoot three times at center of mass and bad guy goes down. Bad guy is on the floor, so is your wife. You aren't sure whether or not the bad guy can resume his attack if you go to your wife's assistance. What do you do? Now how much fun are we having in our world of make believe?

[This message has been edited by Ankeny (edited October 15, 1999).]
 
Unfortunetly for BG 2X 230gr .45 auto JHP's double tapped from my 1911 would probably be just a little past any aid I may have to offer...

------------------
SURE SHOT
 
Now this periforated BG has just killed my family?

thats a whole different situation..

Think of this:
BG approaches you as your about to get into your car at the local 7-11. He has a knife and refuses to obey verbal commadns. You draw down on him and he keeps coming.
Double Tap.
He is down.
Do you give aid?

If he still has a pulse - you should.
Let me say that another way.
If you did not kill him outright - you should.

If this guy was in the house and just hurt your family...
I wouldnt let him die! Thats getting off too easy. I would have to get Medieval on him.

------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
 
This is purely a question of ethics. It would also depend a great deal on a thousand variables that would make up the exact situation that you were dealing with. While I am prepared to do what ever it takes to preserve my life and the lives of my loved ones, I seriously doubt that I could stand by and do nothing while watching someone bleed to death. BG or not, a life is a life. I'd try to help.
 
Ankeny, Now I get it! You're Mas Ayoob and you've been lurking! Welcome, at last, to the Firing Line!

------------------
Remember: When you attempt to rationalize two inconsistent positions, you risk drowning as your own sewage backs up... Yankee Doodle
 
didn't CBS just show the police in CA let the bank robber with the assault rifle bleed out for 45 minutes?

dZ
 
I think I would go to the aid of the person he shot. Who's life is more valuable.


Just How S.....L....o....w.....l....y can you dial 911

of course with a 10mm magnum he aint leaving alive anyhow!
 
Ankeny,

To clarify myself, I do no condone shooting a man that is already down. I more or less agree with George Hill...need to reconsider your sidearm of choice if it isn't killing the bad guy. Anyone that would go and kill the downed man is either a criminal or the NYPD. (I know, that was a low one)
 
In order to minimize criminal liability, I would DEFINITELY give all the medical aid I am trained to give, which is not much, and definitely ask for an ambulance first on the 911 call, then for police, too, because "there's been a shooting" - all of this is assuming the VTA ("violence-threatening aggressor" - high-dollar way of saying BG - perhaps TFLers could adopt this abbr.) is truly disarmed and no longer a threat (hand-cuffed or incapacitated), AND assuming you are wearing latex gloves to protect yourself from the VTA's bodily fluids.

[This message has been edited by Futo Inu (edited October 15, 1999).]
 
Let me be clear. Aiding the wounded BG does not mean you have to personally plug the holes; unless you are a physician or a qualified medical tech, calling 911 should be enough. Shooting him again is another story. And I agree that taking care of the good guys is first priority.

But here is a story about how believing old nonsense can get you in real trouble. It really happened in Maryland, not too far from here.

A bar owner refused to sell any more liquor to a man who was already drunk. After much "discussion", the bar owner forcibly evicted the patron. The drunk yelled that he was "going to get a gun and come back and get you." This threat was heard by several other patrons.

After the bar closed, and the bar owner was alone, he saw the ex-patron looking in the window. Recalling the threat, the bar owner fired his .357 Magnum revolver through the window, dropping the other man.

If the bar owner had called an ambulance and police at that point, and considering the known threat, he would probably have had little trouble, even though the drunk was not armed and seems to have made no threatening motions.

But the bar owner, having heard from gun shop legal experts that "if you shoot him in the yard, drag him inside", did just that, dragging the badly wounded man into the bar. Then, as someone here advised, he shot the man again as he lay on the floor, killing him. Then he broke out the window, and called the police.

He told police that the man had broken in through the window, appeared to be reaching for a gun, and that he had fired in self-defense.

Needless to say, it took the cops 32.5 nanoseconds to figure out what really happened and to arrest the bar owner for murder. The jury took ten minutes to convict on a first degree murder charge, and the ex-bar owner is serving 20-to-life.

That, folks, is reality, not the movies, not a video game, not some juvenile fantasy.

Jim


[This message has been edited by Jim Keenan (edited October 15, 1999).]
 
Jim, From what you describe the bar owner got what was coming to him period. Even if he had ignored his purveyers of "gunshop legal advice" and not dragged the man inside ( I think this is disturbing a crime scene) and proceeded to commit a series of compounding felonys, he would STILL be guilty of murder. I don't think many DA's would have let this one slide, and rightly so. A public threat does not give one license to drop an unarmed loudmouth from inside a locked building within arms length of a phonecall to local authorities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top